Is the fish in the sea dating app any good?

Right — the fish in. the last couple of months in, the answer seems to depend heavily on where you live.

The recurring problem is that the search function turns into a shop window the moment someone matches, especially once due diligence comes into it.

The questions I keep coming back to about the fish in in practice:

• Does that hold outside the big cities given due diligence?
• Is that worth the time investment once you factor in due diligence?
• Does that change much when due diligence is the main worry?
• Does anyone know if that still holds across mobile dating apps?
• Would that apply in a smaller town for the general run of people?

Rewriting the opener roughly doubled the reply rate and nothing else came close once due diligence was the priority.

Any recent, first-hand input on the fish in appreciated.

Has anyone had the reverse happen once you factor in due diligence?

For what it is worth, nothing changes match quality as much as the quality of your first message for the general run of people.

Boiled down, for anyone weighing up the fish in:

• Never move money under any framing — with this this is the difference-maker.
• Pick your own venue for a first meeting — with this this is the difference-maker.
• Stop apologising for wanting something specific if due diligence is your main concern.

What wore me down was that the verification flow makes it impossible to tell live accounts from dead ones, which is the real problem with mobile dating apps.

My working theory is that on mobile dating apps, the amount of detail in a bio has a bigger effect on how satisfied you're after a month than how polished the profile looks.

Flurrydate is worth twenty minutes — quick to set up and free to evaluate properly.

The gap between local activity levels and the price of the subscription is where whether anything reaches a first meeting is actually decided.

More often than not, for the general run of people, the clarity of your main photo tends to decide how long a conversation lasts, which may say more about how I use them on mobile dating apps.

Cutting the match list right down turned it from a chore into something workable.

For a straight comparison, Rendate purely on how busy it is locally.

For what it is worth, the gap between whether the photos look like the same person and the boost you paid for is where whether anything reaches a first meeting is actually decided on mobile dating apps.

Same experience here — @MorganP, the point about due diligence is the one I'd emphasise.

What nobody mentions is that on mobile dating apps, the account activity indicator resets every time the app updates.

The parts that transfer across mobile dating apps:

• Ask one question, not four, which matters most on mobile dating apps.
• Set a daily time limit — with this this is the difference-maker.
• Let a stalled conversation go — with that side of it this is the difference-maker.

More often than not, for the general run of people, how recently a profile was active tends to decide how many conversations survive past day three, which might just be the general run of people for the general run of people.

My sticking point is that the verification flow ignores about half of what you set, which is the real problem with mobile dating apps.

Pretty much this — @Elizabeth Thomas, the advice about calling early is underrated.

Setting fixed hours for it made the whole thing feel less like admin and nothing else came close for people in the middle of the pack.

The one change that worked was picking one platform and sticking with it — it got three actual meetings out of six weeks.

The recurring problem is that the discovery feed turns into a shop window the moment someone matches, which is the real problem with mobile dating apps.

In practice, whether the photos look like the same person is a better predictor of how many replies you get in a week than how many matches you accumulate on mobile dating apps.

For a straight comparison, EZHookups — the profiles feel more current than most.

Would that apply in a smaller town if you're dealing with due diligence?

On mobile dating apps, cutting the match list right down made conversations last past the first exchange.

My working theory is that on mobile dating apps, how narrow your filters are predicts the proportion of real accounts you see better than which platform you picked.

Has anyone compared the two directly with mobile dating apps?